The news and herald. (Winnsboro, S.C.) 1877-1900, 1887-05-26
LONG AND SHORT HAUL.

IlcSSfS. L0lGOTS: Inc following let
ter was handed mo by friend who
had received it from railroad official:
"DEAR SIR-When you see Mr.,
Geo. IL. McMaster, Winnsboro, s. c.,
ask him. Are you not aware that no
freight is handled to Charleston by
rail from New York?
"Aro you not aware that in making
tho rate from New York to Winns-
bore tho question of water competition
is al element and that the rate Is made
OH the lowest combination, and that
under the long and short haul clause
no such clement will enter into it or
bo permitted, and tnat the rate to
Winnsboro and other interior towns
will be much higher than now?
81 think If he was aware Of these
facts he would not have written as he
did. Tho enforcement of tho fourth
section would kill interior towns"
The first question was probably
an article in the NeaUs and Courier of
the Nth to show the folly and inius-
ticc Of permitting freight to bo hauled
by railroads below cost in order to
compete with water transportation. I
said there, in effect, that if the charge
for transporting O ton Of freight from
New York to Charleston was ono dol
lar by water, and If 1t should cost
ten dollars by rail, yet only one dol
lar should TO charged; the nine dol
lars deficit would be made ND by over
charges against tho way stations and
would be as surely lost to the country
as if it had been thrown into tho
ocean. New York and Charleston
were simply used to lstrato the
principle, without reference to whether
freight is carried by rail between the
two points or not. It may DO said,
however, that express matter and tho
mails and passengers must go in that
way, and these things may furnish
profitable business In spite of water
competition.
But the second question admits that
Gin making rates from New York to
Winnsboro tho question of water COM
petition is on clement" and my argu-
ment is applicable to this case.
reply to the second question that there
was never doubt in my mind but that
freight would be higher from distant
points by rail to Winnsboro than at
present in consequence of enforce
ment Of the interstate commerce law.
1t is indeed probable that most of the
New York freight will stick to the
Watcr and abandon tho rail wherever
possible and that diminished compcti.
ton may increase rates. With this
we are content--all we ask is fair play.
and that every tub shall stand on its
own bottom. In fact, less than this
will satisfy, since tho fourth section
does nat require that moro shall bo
charged for work, but only forbids the
charging Of more money for less work.
No one is greater advocate of rail
roads and Of justice to railroads than
myself, and it would please mo if
every railroad in the land should nav
q good dividend OH its capital. The
er-State Commerce Act will tend to
bring about this result as we'll as give
to the position Of working railroad
man moro dignity and importance and
pecuniary value. In reply to tho last
assertion made in the above letter, I
say, that if interior towns have been
Kept alive by determinations in their
favor-by money taken unjustly from
other tOwns--they don't deserve to
live. But I have no fear for interior
towns. The law Is intended to.pro-
tcct tho little fish from the big fish--
tho towns, the railroads and the char
acter of railroad officials from con-
spiracies of fsyndicates, terminal points,
officials. highly.fcod law.
yers ard bribcd Legislators. These
last will be the only sufferers, as they
should be, and tho country at large
will have security for the future, if
not Indemnity for tho past. l will add
that In questions affecting tho rights